TMI Blog2009 (10) TMI 954X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h ultimately led to suicide - conflicting judgments of the Trial Court and the High Court - High Court has reversed the judgment of acquittal passed by the Additional Assistant Sessions Judge, Periyar District in Sessions Case and convicted the accused persons. HELD THAT:- In our considered opinion, the approach of the High Court in the impugned judgment is not in consonance with the settled principles of criminal jurisprudence. The High Court while reversing the judgment of the trial court observed that in all probabilities, I am inclined to hold that there was demand of dowry and the deceased was harassed by the first accused and therefore, she committed suicide. In criminal cases the conviction can be sustained only when there is clear evidence beyond reasonable doubt. The accused cannot be convicted on the ground that in all probabilities the accused may have committed the crime. The approach of the High Court is wholly fallacious and unsustainable in law. Whether the view which has been taken by the trial court was a possible or a plausible view? - We have carefully perused the judgment of the trial court and the impugned judgment of the High Court. The trial cour ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The High Court ought not to have substituted the same by its own possible view. The impugned judgment of the High Court cannot stand the scrutiny of the well settled legal position which has been crystallized for more than 80 years since the case of Sheo Swarup [ 1934 (7) TMI 17 - PRIVY COUNCIL] . In the facts and circumstances of this case, we are constrained to set aside the impugned judgment of the High Court. Consequently, these appeals filed by the appellants are allowed. The impugned judgment of the High Court set aside and that of the trial court is restored. - Dalveer Bhandari and B.S. Chauhan , JJ. For the Appellant : K.V. Viswanathan , Sr. Adv., B. Ragunath , Anup Kumar and S.R. Setia , Advs For the Respondents: V. Krishnamurthy , Sr. Adv., P.V. Saravanaraja , Promila and S. Thananjayan , Advs. JUDGMENT Dalveer Bhandari , J. 1. These appeals are directed against the judgment of the High Court of Madras dated 12.3.2002 in Criminal Appeal No. 315 of 1992 and Criminal R.C. No. 691 of 1991 respectively. 2. In the instant case, the High Court has reversed the judgment of acquittal passed by the II Additional Assis ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... si many times to her father for getting money for doing business. According to the prosecution, since the car was not given to the first accused, he had beaten and tortured the deceased asking her to get the car from P.W.1. Mangayarkarasi ultimately became disgusted with her life and at 11.30 a.m. on 15.3.1989, she committed suicide by hanging herself. 9. The prosecution, in order to prove its case, had examined 20 witnesses. K. Ramalingam P.W.1 is the father of the deceased. D. Latha P.W.4 is the sister of the deceased. S.T.P. Muthusamy Mudaliar P.W.5 is the neighbour. Thirumathi N. Yasodha P.W.2 is the tenant of P.W.1 and P.W.3 A. Periasamy is the person who had arranged the marriage of the first accused and the deceased. V.P. Subramaniam P.W.6 is a close relative of the deceased. N. Manickam P.W.8 is a member of the Panchayat. S.A. Periasamy P.W.9 is another Sambandhi of P.W.1 who later on turned hostile. 10. The fact that the deceased had committed suicide by hanging herself is undisputed. The question which arises for our adjudication is whether the appellant is guilty for compelling the deceased to commit suicide. According to the prosecution she was forced to commi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ieved the version of P.W.3 holding that he is not related to P.W.1 and he pleaded ignorance about the date and month of meeting of P.W.1 and accused No. 2. The trial judge also disbelieved the testimony of P.W.1 regarding giving of 4 sovereigns and ₹ 5,000/- to the first accused after the birth of the first child and another sovereign of jewel at the time of birth of the second child for the reason that those facts were not spoken to during investigation. This part of the prosecution case is disbelieved. The trial judge has clearly held that P.W.1 deposed for the first time in the court with regard to demand of a car. He did not mention this fact in the first information report. 13. Ex. P.8 is the suicide note of the deceased which reads as under: Nobody is responsible for my death. Children should be handed over to mother's house. In the suicidal note, the deceased had not implicated any accused. This factor has also weighed heavily with the trial court in acquitting all the accused. The argument on behalf of the accused was that the accused No. 1 had suspected the character of his mother-in-law and other members of his in- law's family, so he did not want ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed either before the police officer or during Revenue Divisional Officers' enquiry. 19. The trial court disbelieved the version of P.W.1 regarding giving 4 sovereigns and ₹ 5,000/- to the first accused after the birth of the first child and another sovereign of jewel at the time of birth of the second child for the reason that those facts were not spoken to during the investigation. The High Court held this part of the prosecution case unbelievable, but the fact remains that the demand of dowry was proved beyond doubt through the evidence of P.Ws. 1 and 3. This approach of the High Court is not correct. 20. The High Court ought to have considered the entire evidence in a proper perspective. Unless comprehensive view of the entire evidence is taken in the proper perspective, a correct conclusion may not be possible. In this case, there has been acquittal by the trial court and, while reversing the order of acquittal, the High Court ought to have carefully considered the following circumstances: (1) In the suicide note Ex. P-8, the deceased has not implicated any of the accused. This is indeed a very significant and vital factor which ought to have received pro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nchayat's decision caused serious depression to the deceased. It is submitted that the deceased's strong affinity towards her parents and her inability to cope up with the situation coupled with her sickness, she was driven to such a situation to commit suicide. (9) R. Murugesan P.W.15, the RDO who prepared the inquest report has also stated about the panchayat's decision and has opined that the reason for her death may be the control exerted on her that she should not go to her mother's house . (10) The trial court has observed that when the accused were questioned under Section 313 Cr.P.C., they filed a written statement jointly. In that written statement it has been explained that - Due to mental agony, incurable stomach-ache, pain over the body and the control by the first accused that she should not go to the house of her parents, Mangayarkarasi had committed suicide . Further that Arulvelu, without marrying for the second time for several years looked after the children with lot of love and affection so that the children may not feel the absence of their mother. The family of accused is a joint family. In that family, accused Nos. 1 to 3 and Vijayakum ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ks. K. Sivanandhan, Deputy Superintendent of Police P.W.17 has stated that P.W.4 has not stated that failure to buy a car became a problem. She has not stated about the demand of 50 sovereigns and a car. Therefore the trial court has disbelieved the presence of P.W.4 during the talks. D. Latha P.W.4 has not given in her evidence that she had known personally that little by little 20 sovereign were given. The trial court has held that P.W.4 does not speak anything about the timings of the torture like four weeks, 20 days or 8 days before the death. (15) S.T.P. Muthusamy Mudaliar P.W.5's testimony does not inspire confidence. He says that during the verbal argument between A-1 and Rukmani Amma, A-1 asked about car. However, Yasodha P.W.2 did not say the same. Further, Rukmani Amma was not examined. It is submitted that the trial court has discussed the contradictions between P.W.2, P.W.1 and P.W.5 and about utterance with regard to car in the quarrel and therefore the trial court has not relied on P.W.5. It is submitted that apart from Rukminiammal, Shaktivel (P.W.1's son) and Planniappan was also not examined by the prosecution. (16) S.A. Periyasamy P.W.9 (Samban ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... came to Rukmanniammal and told that `because of you, A am very ashamed'. P.W.15 has also stated that P.W.1 had not told him that before marriage there was any discussion about dowry on presence of some persons. Further that none of the witnesses has stated that they discussed about jewels and car before the marriage. (20) The Panchayat's decision coupled with the condition of illness could have driven the deceased to commit suicide. This possibility cannot be ruled out. P.W.15 has also stated that on 22.3.89 a panchayat was convened to decide on the issue of dispute between both the families. In that Panchayat it has been decided that they should not visit each others house and Mangaiyarkarasi has to be advised accordingly. (21) The High Court has made erroneous observation that: It is not the panchayat decision that the deceased should not visit her parents. The only thing is P.W.1 should not go to the house of the accused. As per the case of prosecution and as per the evidence it is crystal clear that the Panchayat's decision was that `both the familiar should not visit each other'. (22) The High Court failed to appreciate that the prosecution has ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g the blame of being perverse and the findings rendered by the trial court are against the weight of evidence. The law is well settled that, in an appeal against acquittal, unless the judgment of the trial court is perverse, the Appellate Court would not be justified in substituting its own view and reverse the judgment of acquittal. 26. The expression `perverse' has been dealt with in number of cases. In Gaya Din (Dead) through LRs. and Ors. v. Hanuman Prasad (Dead) through LRs. and Ors. (2001) 1 SCC 501 this Court observed that the expression `perverse' means that the findings of the subordinate authority are not supported by the evidence brought on record or they are against the law or suffer from the vice of procedural irregularity. 27. In Parry's (Calcutta ) Employees' Union v. Parry Co. Ltd. and Ors. AIR 1966 Cal. 31 the Court observed that `perverse finding' means a finding which is not only against the weight of evidence but is altogether against the evidence itself. 28. In Triveni Rubber Plastics v. Collector of Central Excise, Cochin AIR 1994 SC 1341 the Court observed that this is not a case where it can be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... order of acquittal of the appellants recorded by the trial court as the same did not suffer from the vice of perversity. 34. In Kuldeep Singh v. The Commissioner of Police and Ors. (1999) 2 SCC 10 the Court while dealing with the scope of Articles 32 and 226 of the Constitution observed as under: 9. Normally the High Court and this Court would not interfere with the findings of fact recorded at the domestic enquiry but if the finding of guilt is based on no evidence, it would be a perverse finding and would be amenable to judicial scrutiny. 10. A broad distinction has, therefore, to be maintained between the decisions which are perverse and those which are not. If a decision is arrived at on no evidence or evidence which is thoroughly unreliable and no reasonable person would act upon it, the order would be perverse. But if there is some evidence on record which is acceptable and which could be relied upon, howsoever compendious it may be, the conclusions would not be treated as perverse and the findings would not be interfered with. 35. The meaning of `perverse' has been examined in H.B. Gandhi, Excise and Taxation Officer-cum- Assessing Authorit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... SC 1; Atley v. State of Uttar Pradesh AIR 1955 SC 807; Balbir Singh v. State of Punjab AIR 1957 SC 216; M.G. Agarwal v. State of Maharashtra AIR 1963 SC 200; Khedu Mohton and Ors. v. State of Bihar (1970) 2 SCC 450; Bishan Singh and Ors. v. The State of Punjab (1974) 3 SCC 288; K. Gopal Reddy v. State of Andhra Pradesh (1979) 1 SCC 355; Tota Singh and Anr. v. State of Punjab (1987) 2 SCC 529; Sambasivan and Ors. v. State of Kerala (1998) 5 SCC 412; Bhagwan Singh and Ors. v. State of M.P. (2002) 4 SCC 85; Harijana Thirupala and Ors. v. Public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P., Hyderabad (2002) 6 SCC 470; State of Rajasthan v. Raja Ram (2003) 8 SCC 180; Budh Singh and Ors. v. State of UP (2006) 9 SCC 731; Kalyan Singh v. State of M.P. (2006) 13 SCC 303; Kallu alias Masih and Ors. v. State of MP (2006) 10 SCC 313; and State of Goa v. Sanjay Thakran and Anr. (2007) 3 SCC 755] 37. In Shambhoo Missir and Anr. v. State of Bihar (1990) 4 SCC 17 this Court observed thus: We are of the view that the High Court has interfered with the order of acquittal passed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The accused is presumed to be innocent until proven guilty. The accused possessed this presumption when he was before the trial court. The trial court's acquittal bolsters the presumption that he is innocent. 2. The power of reviewing evidence is wide and the appellate court can re-appreciate the entire evidence on record. It can review the trial court's conclusion with respect to both facts and law, but the Appellate Court must give due weight and consideration to the decision of the trial court. 3. The appellate court should always keep in mind that the trial court had the distinct advantage of watching the demeanour of the witnesses. The trial court is in a better position to evaluate the credibility of the witnesses. 4. The appellate court may only overrule or otherwise disturb the trial court's acquittal if it has very substantial and compelling reasons for doing so. 5. If two reasonable or possible views can be reached - one that leads to acquittal, the other to conviction - the High Courts/appellate courts must rule in favour of the accused. 40. This Court in a recently delivered judgment State of Rajasthan v. Naresh @ Ram Naresh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ain examined the aforementioned decisions and analyzed the principles emerging out of the said decisions, it seems to us that despite series of judgments, the High Court has not clearly appreciated the legal position. Unquestionably, the Appellate Court has power to review and re-appreciate the entire evidence on record. The appellate court would be justified in reversing the judgment of acquittal only if there are substantial and compelling reasons and when the judgment of the trial court is found to be perverse judgment. Interfering in a routine manner where other view is possible is contrary to the settled legal position crystallized by aforementioned judgments of this Court. The accused is presumed to be innocent until proven guilty. The accused possessed this presumption when he was before the trial court. The trial court's acquittal bolsters the presumption that he is innocent. This fundamental principle must be kept in view while dealing with the judgments of acquittal passed by the trial court. 45. We have re-examined the entire case because of the conflicting judgments of the Trial Court and the High Court. On careful marshalling of the entire evidence and the doc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
